yeah, metacritic in charge once again...Seriously, the metacritic should not be displayed on Steam at all, with a score as high as 80, people have expectations, and they are certainly not expecting an interactive wallpaper. This almost qualifies for desinformation.

Seriously, I'm slowly loosing my nerves. I wonder why people can't shut the ♥♥♥♥ up with their annoying gibberish, no one asked you for your ♥♥♥♥ing opinion and I wonder why you dare to think that the critics are wrong and you're right. I, as well as thousands of others, (and the critics) seem to like the game, so please would you mind getting lost? Your post qualifies for desinformation because the amount of prattle is too damn high (it's likely over 9000!)

why is that? I beleive I have made a valid point in my post. If the critics had a common framework for notation where the different elements of the game are weighted separately, the game wouldn't reach 50, because it lacks most of the elements that make a game a game. Yet, we still have such a thing as metacritic on the storepage for the sole purpose of luring people into clicking the purchase button.

Metacritic is marginally useful because every reviewer has a different framework for reviewing, but an agrigation of those frameworks can give us an idea about that game. Of course a number isn't going to provide you all the information you need to know (and Metacritic is notoriously fickle), but it can be a useful gauge if very distant.

Steam includes as many Metacritic scores as they can (including very low scores) because it helps their users make choices about what they want to purchase. Steam has an incentive to promote purchases, but they also have an incentive to provide a good service even at the expense of some additional sales (because they will get more sales in the long-term if their service is trustworthy).

You shouldn't use a Metacritic score to determine whether you're going to purchase something: it should just be a piece of information you use in your decision. I also don't see how you come to the conclusion that Proteus shouldn't be rated what it is rated.

Definition of video game: any of various games played using a microcomputer with a keyboard and often joysticks to manipulate changes or respond to the action or questions on the screen.

Proteus falls under this category. Video games are art, and in art is freedom to do anything. So it got an 80 and you believe that an 80 must have certain qualifications? Like what? Kill streaks? XP? GTFO!

All of those are gimmick, the gameelements I was talking about would be characters, story, gameplay, pathing, things that you would evaluate in the review of an adventure game, these things that the game fails to deliver. Now all games do not need to have all the elements, but when the only thing you can evaluate are the aesthetics and music, there is something wrong, the lack of everything else should have a weight of some sort, or the game should not be put into the "adventure" category by Steam.

All of those are gimmick, the gameelements I was talking about would be characters, story, gameplay, pathing, things that you would evaluate in the review of an adventure game, these things that the game fails to deliver. Now all games do not need to have all the elements, but when the only thing you can evaluate are the aesthetics and music, there is something wrong, the lack of everything else should have a weight of some sort, or the game should not be put into the "adventure" category by Steam.

But it is an adventure!

It has gameplay. It's not as demanding on how you play it because most of the systems don't foreclose on further gameplay, but there are systems that you learn to interact with and that facilitate structured play. Unless you have a different definition of gameplay.

The game is really well designed in that once you learn how to play it and what affordances it allows, you can have some really startling experiences with it. I think a score of 80 is pretty fair because for what it provides it's an amazingly crafted game.

I really don't think you're giving people much credit if you think they're gonna blindly buy a game based on its Metacritic percentage alone. Sure, a high rating may pique their interest, but it takes a special kind of someone to buy something without even reading a single paragraph about it.

As for Proteus itself, there are plenty who really love it as it is. There's enough affordable games around to fill your library with stuff for any mood, so it's a bit silly how many people (still) seem to want to undermine the merits of this one. If you don't like it, cool. It's fine. Others do, hence it got an 80.

Metacritic has a known anti-indie bias. Love it or hate it, Proteus is a unique game. I rank it as one of the most beautiful games I've played. It deserve damn sight more than 80 when crapola like Mass Effect 3, Dragon Age 2, and BLOPS routinely earn 10/10.

For metacritic to rate a game such as Proteus so high is actually quite an achievement and says alot for the quality of a game with such independant and Do-it-yourself aesthetics. It really does deserve an 80, even just for being such a diamond in the rough (modern gaming has become quite samey).

Also, topic creator, I noticed that you (like most of the haters) don't actually own the game, is it just me or does this always turn out to be the case?

with a score as high as 80, people have expectations, and they are certainly not expecting an interactive wallpaper. This almost qualifies for desinformation.

this is where i think you're mistaken. Proteus is clearly defined both on steam and on its own website. It doenst claim its something its not. Think of an instrument you might buy as a toy for a kid to play with, or look at minecraft's creative mode, these are "games" that ppl play/use and they promote creativity and exploration. They are indeed games worthy of the scores and accolades they've received. That is factually accurate vs. your initial opinion, which you might change (or might not)